Realizing the Manifest Self--the Life Force permeating our humanity--and the Unmanifest source from which it arises.

29 August 2011

Why Masters Criticize Each Other by Osho

Beloved Osho
I do not understand why enlightened masters are critical of each other. Are they not all working towards the higher good? Are they not different flavors of the same truth?

The question you have asked is almost impossible to answer for the simple reason that you are not enlightened yet. You don’t know the ways of the enlightened ones. You don’t know their devices, you don’t know their methods; hence the misunderstanding. An ancient story may help you.... In a great city there were two sweet shops, and one day the owners of both the shops started fighting with each other. Naturally they had no other way to fight, so they started throwing sweets at each other. And the whole city gathered and people were enjoying the sweets that were falling on the street.

When two enlightened masters criticize each other it brings tremendous joy to those who can understand. Its taste is just unbelievable. They are not enemies, their fight is not of the ego. Their fight has a totally different context.

They fight because they know one thing: that the goal is one, but the paths are many. And each master has to defend his path, knowing perfectly well that other paths are as valid as his. But if he starts saying that all the paths are valid, he will not have the impact, the influence on his people. The journey is long and he needs absolute trust.

He is not a philosopher propounding a system of philosophy. His basic concern is that your commitment to the path should be total. To make it total he condemns all other paths, he criticizes all other ways. It is just out of compassion for you. He knows the people on the other path will also reach; and he knows that out of compassion the master on the other path has to criticize him, has to criticize his ways.

This is just a simple methodology to protect the disciple from influences that can take him astray. And the mind is very, very clever in going astray. If all the paths are valid, then what is the necessity of commitment? If all the paths are valid, then what is the necessity of being total?

If all the paths are valid, then why not travel all the paths, why not go on changing, enjoying different ways, different methods, different sceneries? Each path will pass through different lands; there are paths that will go through the desert, and there are paths which will go through the mountains, and there are paths which will pass through beautiful flowering trees.

But if you travel some time on one path and then you change the path, you will have to start again from ABC. Whatever you have learned on one path is invalid on another path, and if you go on keeping it within you it is going to create tremendous confusion. You are already in a great mess; no master wants you to be more confused!

Your mind always wants change. It does not know devotion; it loves fashions, its interest is always in some novelty. So it will go on moving from one path to another path, becoming more and more confused because each path has its own language, each path has its own unique methods, and each master is going to defend his path against all the other paths.

If you move on many paths you will collect contradictory arguments; you will become so much divided you will not know what to do. And if it becomes your habit to change paths – because the new has a certain attraction for the mind – you will move a few feet on one path, a few feet on another path, but you will never complete the journey.

One day Jalaluddin Rumi took all his students, disciples and devotees to a field. That was his way to teach them things of the beyond, through the examples of the world. He was not a theoretician, he was a very practical man. The disciples were thinking, “What could be the message, going to that faraway field... and why can’t he say it here?”

But when they reached the field, they understood that they were wrong and he was right. The farmer seemed to be almost an insane man. He was digging a well in the field – and he had already dug eight incomplete wells. He would go a few feet and then he would find that there was no water. Then he would start digging another well... and the same story was continued. He had destroyed the whole field and he had not yet found water.

The master, Jalaluddin Rumi, told his disciples, “Can you understand something? If this man had been total and had put his whole energy into only one well, he would have reached to the deepest sources of water long ago. But the way he is going he will destroy the whole field and he will never be able to make a single well. With so much effort he is simply destroying his own land, and getting more and more frustrated, disappointed: what kind of a desert has he purchased? It is not a desert, but one has to go deep to find the sources of water.”

He turned to his disciples and asked them, “Are you going to follow this insane farmer? Sometimes on one path, sometimes on another path, sometimes listening to one, sometimes listening to another... you will collect much knowledge, but all that knowledge is simply junk, because it is not going to give you the enlightenment you were looking for. It is not going to lead you to the waters of eternal life.”

Masters enjoy tremendously criticizing others. If the others are really enlightened, they also enjoy being criticized. They know that the purpose of both is the same: to protect the vagrant mind of the disciple. To keep him on one track, they have to deny that there is any other path anywhere that can lead you except this one.

This is not said out of an egoistic attitude; this is said out of love. This is simply a device to make you committed, devoted. The journey is long, the night is long, and if you go astray you can go on round and round for eternity without finding anything.

[...]

Gautam Buddha criticized the seers of the Vedas, he criticized the seers of the Upanishads, he criticized Mahavira, he criticized everybody that he could find – Krishna, Rama, all the Hindu gods. Continuously for forty years he was criticizing every old scripture, every old prophet, every old savior.

But he was not an enemy of anyone. He was criticizing all those people so that you could be unconditioned, so that you could be freed from the clinging with the past which cannot help you. When a living enlightened being is present, he cannot allow you to remain clinging with the dead, which can only be a weight on your heart but cannot become wings for your freedom.

It needs tremendous insight and meditative understanding to have a little glimpse of the world of an enlightened person. I have criticized many: only a few of them were enlightened; most of them were simply frauds. The frauds have to be absolutely exposed to humanity.

Even those who were enlightened have become only a tradition, a convention, a dead belief. You have to be freed from their grip also, because they cannot help you, they can only hinder your path. They can become your chains, but they cannot become your freedom.

I can become your freedom. I am your freedom.

When I am gone I hope there may be still courageous people in the world to criticize me, so that I don’t become a hindrance on anybody’s path. And those who will criticize me will not be my enemies; neither am I the enemy of those whom I have criticized. The working of the enlightened masters just has to be understood.

You should remember only one word, and that is compassion – compassion for you, compassion for all those who are still not centered in their being, who are still far away from themselves, who have to be called back home.

46 comments:

HiI like this . Who will be hurt by giving criticism to a teacher Not the true master but the disciples who invest there egos into their discipleship.I have seen so many times students who. defend the most stupid behaviour of their teachers. And sometimes it is plain wrong like sai baba and his underage boys.Ediji, please continue calling a spade a spade i love your clear as mud teaching style.

Dear Ed, Your post prompted me to Google Osho. I didn't realize he was Rajneesh until I read something written by a disciple of his who knew him from his early years. He believed Osho was enlightened, even though he ultimately became a total whack job/liar/drug addict/criminal. He mentions his condemnation of other teachers. Here’s what he says:

“The young Acharya Rajneesh started his life as a teacher who condemned false gurus and ended his life as one of the most deceitful gurus the world has ever known. The difficult fact to comprehend is that he was enlightened when he was an anti-guru puritan and he was still enlightened when he was the ultimate corrupt, self-indulgent guru himself. This seemingly irreconcilable contradiction is the real reason I write this essay. I love to go into uncharted territory where others fear to tread.”

This seems to be a balanced, truthful account and you might want to check it out. See: http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/Bhagwan_osho.htm

I’ve had my own experience (many years) with a guru who lied and manipulated followers and also bashed “false gurus” often, so I’m really sensitive to this issue. Reading the Osho account, along with your posts, leaves me with more questions than answers. I’ll just need to sit with this whole thing a bit and see where it takes me, but thought you and others might be interested in seeing this since Osho is in the spotlight.

Thank you for the link. It is a very good read. I do not like liars and value integrity as much as enlightenment. I see all these recent posts as a defense and excuse for being simply human without admitting it.

I get the drift of what you're saying Ed but i'd think twice about quoting Osho not because of the usual controversies associated with him but because from what i've read by him,it doesn't take much for him to jump to hasty conclusions.If i had to point an instance,i read in his 'books i've loved' that Ramana was a great master but a poor writer.He bases this opinion solely on the question and answer version of 'who am i?'He did not care to confirm whether the Maharishi had written anything else(he claims he's written just this small pamphlet),he doesn't know under which circumstances that pamphlet came to be(who was asking the questions in 'who am i' ?/did that person make any alterations?)and that there's a variant of who am i?(the essay version) which the Maharishi has edited himself.It's perfectly alright not to know these things but then why assert something about someone with such certitude on the basis of incomplete information.Osho claims J Krishnamurthi's(JK) teaching is dry,serious,lifeless and that he did not chalk out any path.Well osho felt the need to draw from every master/teaching so what exactly is his 'path/teaching'.Is it merely commentary on other teachings or a set of insights half absurd,half penetrating?It comes across as fun alright interspersed with tales drawn from so many sources but without a clear theme ever so often it becomes mere entertainment- frivolous,digressing and confusing .One moment he says one thing and the next instant,he contradicts it(he himself accepts this reasoning that this keeps away the unsteady 'doubtful' ones).He's also spoken about Nisargadatta maharaj in unflattering terms(http://www.messagefrommasters.com/Psychic-World/osho-on-nisargadatta.htm)without having any real basis for the same.There must be some minimum criterion based on which one holds an opinion or one can go on asserting anything without checking it's veracity.Either hold a valid opinion or go the 'original' way negating all other teachings as Osho accuses JK of doing.He likes to call JK life negating(passive) while he refers to himself as wonderfully life affirming having drawn from every teaching and having propounded 'dynamic' meditations.Is that the case really?Anyways,having said all this,i'd like to tell you Ed that you've done nothing wrong in uploading that video of mooji or commenting on it.Infact,I see it as something healthy.I am the same guy who shared his experiences at tiruvannamalai with you(Mooji satsang participants wearing placards saying-'In silence')in the comments section(anonymously) of the mooji post.Btw this osho post seems to've been posted twice on your blog..

After my post posted, I started to feel your presence really strongly and was thinking about how much I missed you at satsang and how I wanted to share that with you. I’m in tears as I write this. Your love and presence are so powerful. Then I saw your post and knew why I was feeling you at that moment.

About your post, I agree with you completely. It has seemed to me that these posts have been an attempt of the ego to defend itself and I’ve been waiting, hoping for an acknowledgment of that. But I’m always open to the possibility that I may be missing something.

In recent years, maybe even more like months, I have learned to trust my feelings, my inner sense more, and it just doesn’t feel comfortable to me when people badmouth others--gurus or not. At least that’s where I’m at right now.

Please trust your inner sense. That inner knowing is what exploded for me when I met Edji. Now I just can't ignore it and it helps me live the lie according to my heart's desires, attuned to my pure beingness, happier than ever in the midst of utter chaos.

With respect Ed a enlighten, awaken teacher as you claim to be does not act as you do, First you become critical of another teacher and then you get some fall out from other readers and then for 2 days you fill your blog up with rebuttals quoting Osho to save face. This is really nonsense making more nonsense, Your blog simply lost it's spirit sometime ago. As a previous poster posted let it go and I will add get some rest for yourself.

I heard a joke once that every time Osho got a new roles-royce, he would have his picture taken with it, write "fuck you" on the back, and mail it to J. Krishnamurti.

Personally, I think Enlightened sages like Osho terrify, simply terrify ordinary people stuck in morals and dogma. And really terrify people with conceptions that a Sage is some superman above having a beer, getting laid, or inhaling some sweet NO.

Talking about Osho,the ultimate rascal...he would just about do anything to shock you out of illusion. He never felt an obligation to make himself palatable. Seekers come in lots of categories - window shoppers, students, disciples etc etc and then there are devotees. They cluster around a guru. The guru gives out the same to all yet each can absorb only according to their own quality of seeking. Osho remains love of my heart and the blessings of that heart connection - by God, only if I had words to describe... Ruby

I am amazed by all the guru concepts that rotate about this issue. The concept that "true" gurus are politically correct is so 60s. If you were close to a true teacher for just two years, all your preconceptions would be shot.

So many who comment here do so in the fashion, "I can't imagine Ramana doing so and so." This is the beginning and end of their exposure to real teachers--book reading.

Joan is so, so right saying most of us live lives of liars and hypocrites and self-deceit.

The Garys of the world just live in a world or prissy conventionality, or else are shills for one guru or another.

This talk of authenticity is usually of ones own bullshit and self-deceit.

I'll tell you, Mooji just missed it. He may be a fine teacher, but he missed it with the woman below. He had no idea of how to handle this woman's emotions and instead delivered a talk to the crowd. Anyone who defends his actions as above criticism really has no idea.

Obviously a lot of us love our dramaOther wise would we have a need to come to this site of Ed's and talk some shitWe love our story and hold on to it and defend it so keenly..I speak for myself...but maybe others also :)

This all just emphasizes to me that the real "Whatever" (my new name for it) doesn't need anyone to speak for it. If one is looking anywhere but at the "I am", one is probably just wasting time. So, it really doesn't matter what you are doing if you are not doing that. (google up the "Perennial Philosophy" for a nice chuckle, althought I don't pretend to understand it. "John-Wren Lewis" might be a good example of it.) Yay, Whatever. Good Luck, Paul

I have been dropping many illusions. I took you off the pedestal. In fact you destroyed my ideal of a perfect guru, and many others. I resisted and protested. Fury ran through me. But I surrendered again. I am now learning to love not only your divine presence but your broken humanness. How very human you are and how much divinity runs through you. But really I have been learning to love my Self all along. I am in awe. I love you more than ever. I am more complete with you then ever. I am that I am.

But there is so much more to Authenticity. Osho knew that well and urged us to get to the bottom of our authenticity by uncovering our unconsciousness. To step out of "ones own bullshit and self-deceit" as you put it. Yes, it is a grand lie but what a precious mystery this lie is - called Life. Being authentic is saying yes to the Life one is meant to be, to fully know, to experience completely, to suffer deeply. Ultimately that authenticity is our own Truth, knowing our own heart, our own essence. We are Truth in movement - ever unfolding Knowing, ever expanding Love.

OK, people. Getting laid, smoking some weed or having a beer or even LSD is A LOT different than ordering your followers to get sterilized, wear rubber gloves while having sex, have people spy on each other, and bussing in 2,000 homeless people and giving them beer laced with drugs to rig an election and then dump them back on the streets!

I’m not a prude, nor am I obsessed with having a politically correct guru, and I’m also willing to have my ego blown to bits by a teacher. In many ways, I’m probably one of the more unconventional people I know, and I like crazy people. But I do not like it when people take advantage of each other or deliberately harm each other. I don’t think love expresses itself that way, period. There’s a point where someone, enlightened or not, can get off balance and have their unresolved psychological shit surface and take over. Believe me, I’ve seen it happen.

In the link I posted previously, the author gives a very clear and balanced exposé of the workings of the ego in enlightened gurus and makes a good case for gurus “minding their manners.” I think those defending Osho’s (or anyone’s) behavior on the premise that he was trying to shatter the egos and moral constructs, etc., of his devotees need to read this. Here he mentions Ramana as an exception to some of the bizarre behaviors of some gurus:

“Even enlightened humans have to mind their manners and realize that the Atman is the wondrous phenomena they should promote, not their own fallible and temporary personalities. Ramana Maharshi had the right approach in this regard and that is one reason he is still beloved by all. Ramana Maharshi promoted the Atman, the universal cosmic consciousness, but never his own mortal body and mind.”http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/Bhagwan_osho.htm

I think those of you who would still defend Osho after reading this would have been among those who drank the Kool-Aid in Guyana.

Regardless of his mistake here, to be fair with Mooji, he is one of the few teachers out there who has the nerve to talk about our nature being beyond consciousness.

I can perfectly recall him telling his students to not get stuck on the pure feeling of being, the "I Am", because even that is a perception.

Even Robert Adams, for what Ed says, was reluctant to speak about that which is "beyond consciousness", so it is fair to acknowledge Mooji (who also seems to be a genuinely nice guy) for being a brave teacher and going to the core, something rare in these "new age" days.

Dear Janet B, you are a harsh mistress. I had to count my remaining toes each time I stepped on one of your landmines. But, Oh my God, so many of my defenses were shattered in the process, exposing and destroying ever deeper layers of blindness. So, you are my human truth, conveying knowledge of the human heart. Rare is he or she that can see your depth.

@ Janet C. You said, "I don't think Love expresses itself that way, period." I do respect your opinion, but would like to share what I am currently experiencing about this Love.

The word love is more misunderstood than the word God.There is no reference within the mortal mind for Pure Love. It is not at all informed about what the mind's of mere men have written, spoken, sung, thought, preached, or propogated in its name. It is not of this world, thus those who are caught deeply in its embrace are often branded, excluded and judged harshly. And, what else are we to do until we are imprisoned by and shackled to it, until we know it as our own essence, until we begin to taste of infinite surrender? This is what we do, we entertain ourselves with our ideas about Love...and I say this too is Love. Everything is in its right place and everything belongs.

We like to think we can blame Love or put it on trial. There is no one to witness against it, for there is nothing outside of it. It has no history of past deeds done. It is purely innocent, though there is no one to stand up and delcare it so. We say, "Love would not express itself that way." Yes, this is still a toughie for me as well at times. But I remember that 'I am the seer', and if I am seeing anything but Love/Self/God, then the enquiry is not complete.

These are hard sayings, and harder yet to experientially lay hold of. Love/Surrender is a risk. It is stepping out into the unknown where safety and security cease to be constant companions. The benefits are priceless, the judgments harsh and constant.

Just read this poem by St John of the Cross, a mystic poet.

IT IS GOD WHO SHOULD ASK

With all humilityI say,it is God who should ask for forgiveness, not we, Him.Someday you will know this.A saint could explain.

EdjiI came on your site when I was having problems with my Osho Sannyas and I read the story you told about Robert Adams having the same faraway look and about him confirming Osho’s enlightenment.

That hit me like a thunderbolt, because I always trusted Robert Adams transcripts and tapes and my Sannyas exploded again as I realised the Oceanic All-Pervading One speaking through all the Masters and then I made contact with you and grounded it all.

That All-Pervading Oceanic One is you. I know it because today I entered the site again and you, an Advaita Vedanta Master had just the right information at just the right time yet again.

My conflict was that I loved Nisargadatta Maharaj so much that I wanted to reject my Osho Sannyas because he criticised him and called him a mere beedie baba.

Robert Adams saved me at that point but I was still not clear. Then you post Osho on Masters criticising each other for the good of the disciple - the exact conflict I am going through - I'm sure I need not tell you how powerful my realization is.

Thanks again Osho you Edji are truly the Oceanic One leading and directing your Sannyasins.

"Regardless of his mistake here, to be fair with Mooji, he is one of the few teachers out there who has the nerve to talk about our nature being beyond consciousness."

This is so true. I have been following this blog somewhat. Mooji is one of the rare ones that actually speaks about prior to consciousness. I was surprise that Ed saw it fit to take a isolated event with Mooji and a student and make such a issue from it. Masters are still human and they will slip up from time to time. Ed, Robert Adams and many others have slip from time to time. So what's the point to work so hard to find a slip? I sat with Robert in Sedona and I will tell you there were many times Robert pissed off some newcomers as he was simply not there for any one. Does this diminished Robert teachings? It's sad on a blog that is suppose to be spirituality uplifting that this kind of immature pot shooting needs to happen.

Get this. I did not make a big thing about Mooji’s mistake. Everyone else did. Know nothing of Mooji. I don’t watch his talks. I don’t care. But that clip was sent to me. I saw it and saw his mistake. I was not judging his entire teaching style or his as a guru. I saw one clip and saw one mistake, which was a mistake I had recently made times myself. I saw his error, which was my error to. I announced this too in many places.

But a cult of political correctness has seeped into spirituality, where you have to check every word you say or you will be attacked for not being spiritual enough or not enough like the venerable Ramana Maharshi or some other favorite guru.

Krishnamurti was able to condemn all gurus as phonies or charlatans as was Osho and UG. This is a dialogue about process and correct teachings. It is a seminar about how to handle students in crisis. Do you ignore the crisis and talk over it, or acknowledge the distress and meet the devotee at the level of their distress? I choose the latter approach based on my experience.

I am not condemning Mooji’s entire wisdom teachings. Why is this so hard to grasp?

Dear Joan, thank you for your beautiful and wise words. I am taking all of this, from everyone, into my heart and sitting with it and will see what unfolds. I see that an old wound has been exposed--again. All is well. More clarity is coming, though words only confuse and fall flat at the moment. The poetry and insight that comes from your heart is amazing!

Also why Ed did you allow the post that calls Mooji a A hole and more . I am sure you get some posts calling you the same but are not posted nor should they be. Posts like that should not be allowed.I am not a follower of Mooji nor you or any one but it would do good to censor such posts imho.

This whole post is complete bullshit and you are all loving to eat it! Keep eating!It's too much GARBAGE BUT YOU LOVE IT! May be, Ed put this post so he can see who is gonna eat it! why don't just fu** all teachers and GO WITHIN!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is what I’m starting to wonder myself. Part of what I’m sitting with at the moment.

@ Joan, just so you know, I do see love in all, in the outrageous behaviors of some teachers, and in all of the abusive people I’ve had in my life who’ve verbally criticized me and, in a couple of relationships, physically beaten me up. My experience is what ultimately helped to open my heart, my awareness and understanding of those who are the so-called abusers (and the “abused”) and in any state whatsoever. I forgive all and I love all—the worst of the worst murderers included. I can feel their pain and desperate longing for love. It’s all perfect, and everything is in its perfect place, as you said.

Ed’s criticism felt like a red flag and made me wonder whether I had attracted more of the same into my life, even if it’s not nearly the same magnitude and it’s coming from someone who’s had awakening experiences. I’m not completely clear about this yet.

“This whole post is complete bullshit and you are all loving to eat it!”

Maybe true. All this blog drama has been a reminder to me not to get so attached to points of view and to remember everything is a mirror and all a reflection of Self. This will likely be my last post.

I lied. I’m posting again. A few years ago I heard Osho’s talk on the usage of the word “FUCK” and thought it was hilarious (especially for an editor). A friend sent me the link again a few weeks ago and I still had some laughs. If you haven’t heard this, you might enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D7rWLzloOI. I wonder if he wrote his own material.

Throughout this drama much of what you did was self-inquiry. You listened to a part of your self that detected a "red flag" in Ed's criticism. You felt something deeper within yourself and this matters. You were so open and courageous to listen to it even if it exposed old hurts. This is your truth. You probably realize it is not about what Ed did but about you listening to your heart, to your deeper essence. I want to come and listen with you. I want to know what wants to be uncovered, what wants to claim its existence and be known. I want to be there when you discover the treasure you knew was always there, calling you.

See, we never know how something that can seem to be such a waste of time as this blog - at least to some- creates an opening within us. Everything belongs, nothing is wasted, everything is used wise and lovingly by that mysterious Lover that we don't yet know as ourself.

Michael James' Excellent Sites:

Legal Disclaimer

Copyright 2010 through 2016 Edward Muzika, Ph.D

The information in this blog is a free distribution of Ed Muzika, Ph.D.

http://www.itisnotreal.com/and is not to be sold by any other party as it is to be freely provided to all spiritual seekers. The material used in this blog is available in the Public Domain and does not infringe any intellectual property rights or copyrights.

Any spoken or written material related to the American Master Robert Adams contained on this blog has been taken from public recordings (and related transcripts) taped with Robert’s full permission, and freely distributed worldwide with Robert’s full permission, negating any claims of copyright infringement in any jurisdiction. Transcripts, recordings of his talks, and his photos were freely distributed at his bi-weekly meetings given between 1989 and 1997. Confirmation of this is provided by Robert himself in these recordings and any claims to the contrary are inaccurate and fraudulent. Any photos of Robert Adams used herein were also taken with the permission of Robert Adams and are the personal property of those taking the photos who have freely shared and distributed them.

In addition, opinions expressed here are solely the opinions of Edward Muzika.